> On 22 Dec 2014, at 12:47 am, Dennis E. Hamilton <[email protected]> wrote: > > I am not clear on to what degree Corinthia Source releases will allow > building of binaries that are end-user meaningful and working in anything > more than console sessions. This proposal is intended to anticipate the > prospect of the code being compilable to store "apps" and GUI-based end-user > applications on many form factors and platforms. This proposal is > particularly relevant to cases where forks will compete for monetization, > including via embedded advertising and also sales through search-engine > optimization and purchased ad placement. > > PROPOSAL > > Corinthia project source code releases and the source-code repository shall > build to "white box" binaries and distributions/deployments with default > branding as unsupported Corinthia development editions (stable or otherwise). > Provisions for branding of a distribution (and distributions of forks) will > be incorporated and given default settings. This also extends to producing > digitally-signed versions designed to satisfy certification requirements for > introduction into software "app" stores. There may be instructions for how > to successfully build a branded and supported authentic distribution, but one > should not be directly obtainable using the stable source without > modification.
I think a precursor to this is us determining what exactly Corinthia *is*. My view (and I realise others may differ) is that it is first and foremost a collection of libraries from which one can build end-user applications (be they commercial or open source), rather than an application in and of itself (which is a key difference from OpenOffice). While application develop has been discussed as part of the effort - and I agree is within the scope of what we are doing - I think we risk confusion if we try and use the Corinthia name to refer to a particular application. I see Corinthia as an umbrella project for several different “artifacts” - libraries, applications, and documentation/compliance sheets. One of those artefacts, and the one that has bee discussed almost exclusively to date, is DocFormats. Another artefact, recently contributed but not yet discussed much, is the javascript editing library (which can’t operate by itself but needs a “shell” around it to be useful). There will be applications (sample apps and/or end-user apps) added to this, and possibly additional libraries. So I would suggest that rather than thinking of Corinthia as an end-user application like OO, we can have apps with other names that utilise the libraries that are part of Corinthia, but have different names. If we were trying to replace OpenOffice, a white box/white label “Corinthia” app that users can download and run would make sense; but I don’t think that’s what we’re doing here. — Dr Peter M. Kelly [email protected] PGP key: http://www.kellypmk.net/pgp-key <http://www.kellypmk.net/pgp-key> (fingerprint 5435 6718 59F0 DD1F BFA0 5E46 2523 BAA1 44AE 2966)
